😔 SEND Education Support

Westminster Hall

🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️

MPs passionately debated the critical failures in the UK’s SEND education support system, highlighting a national crisis marked by a 140% increase in EHCPs since 2015 and widespread local failures. Personal stories of parents and children struggling to access necessary support underscored the urgent need for systemic change and sustainable funding. The debate called for immediate action to improve outcomes, with proposals including a national body for SEND to oversee standards and funding, and increased investment in early intervention and specialist placements. The Minister acknowledged the severity of the situation and committed to prioritizing early intervention and inclusive mainstream provision, supported by a £1 billion funding increase.

Summary

  • The debate focused on the crisis in support for children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) in the UK, which is growing and severely affecting young people and families.
  • There has been a 140% increase in children with education, health, and care plans (EHCPs) since 2015, with a total of 1.9 million children identified as having SEND.
  • Funding issues and the need for a sustainable plan were emphasized, along with the call for a comprehensive review of SEND provisions to improve outcomes.
  • Challenges in rural areas, like Suffolk Coastal, were highlighted due to their unique difficulties in providing adequate SEND support.
  • Parents face significant struggles, including long waits for EHCPs and having to resort to tribunals at great personal cost to secure necessary support.
  • Concerns were raised about the inconsistency of support and the need for better integration between education, health, and social care services.
  • The debate included calls for more inclusive mainstream education and increased specialist school places to meet the demand for specialized education.
  • The importance of early diagnosis and intervention was underscored, with examples shared of the negative impact of delays on children’s education and mental health.
  • There was a collective call for urgent government action to address the SEND crisis, improve funding, and ensure better support for SEND children and their families.

Divisiveness

The parliamentary session on SEND education support displayed a moderate level of disagreement, which is reflected in the rating of 3. The disagreements primarily revolved around the causes of the SEND crisis, the effectiveness of past and proposed solutions, and the political responsibility for the current state of affairs.

  1. Disagreement on Historical Responsibility: There was a significant point of contention regarding which political party was responsible for the current crisis in SEND support. Several Labour MPs, such as the Member for Gloucester (Alex McIntyre) and the Member for Derby South (Baggy Shanker), were critical of the Conservative government’s handling of SEND issues over the past 14 years, claiming that the current government had inherited a ‘mess’ and needed to fix it. On the other hand, the Conservative Member for Farnham and Bordon (Gregory Stafford) defended the Conservative government’s actions, citing positive steps taken through the Children and Families Act 2014 and additional funding, while also questioning the current government’s approach to non-EHCP SEND pupils.

    Example: - Alex McIntyre (Lab): ‘It is clear that the last Government failed to invest, failed to plan and failed an entire generation of our children and their parents.’ - Gregory Stafford (Con): ‘Despite the—I have to say—utter nonsense we heard from the hon. Member for Gloucester (Alex McIntyre), the Conservative Government launched a review of the SEND system in 2019 to end the postcode lottery, and committed an extra £700 million in the year 2020-21, an 11% increase on the year prior.’

  2. Disagreement on Policy Effectiveness and Future Directions: There were differing views on the effectiveness of existing policies and the direction needed for future reforms. For instance, the Member for South West Hertfordshire (Mr Mohindra) suggested changes to the statutory framework around parent choice, whereas the Member for Mid Cheshire (Andrew Cooper) focused on the necessity of more integrated work with the NHS to address diagnosis delays. This shows a disagreement on the most critical areas to target for systemic change.

    Example: - Mr Mohindra (Con): ‘From conversations with schools in my area and officers at Hertfordshire county council, it is clear that the parent choice framework needs to change.’ - Andrew Cooper (Lab): ‘There will be no fix to the SEND crisis that does not also address the crisis in CAMHS, so I urge the Minister to continue to work closely with her colleagues in the Department for Health and Social Care and get school-based mental health support rolled out as quickly as possible.’

  3. Disagreement on Solutions for Specific Issues: Specific issues such as funding allocation and the role of private schools in SEND education elicited further disagreement. The Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) of the Liberal Democrats proposed a cap on profits for private equity firms operating SEND schools, which was rejected by Labour. This indicates disagreement on how to address the rising costs and the role of privatization in SEND education.

    Example: - Munira Wilson (LD): ‘I do not think a 20%-plus profit margin in a taxpayer-funded system is acceptable, which is why my Liberal Democrat colleagues and I proposed an amendment to the Bill to extend the profit cap to special schools.’

Despite these disagreements, there was also a notable degree of cooperation and mutual recognition of the severity of the SEND crisis. Many MPs acknowledged the need for collective action and urgent reform, which tempered the overall level of disagreement in the session. The Minister responded to concerns raised and pledged continued focus on resolving the crisis, suggesting a commitment to addressing the issues despite disagreements on specific points.